Do the Writings of Clausewitz have contemporary relevance?

Do the Writings of Clausewitz have contemporary relevance? Carl Von Clausewitz has long been considered one of the most important writers in the field of military strategy and tactics. Born in 1780 he first saw action in 1793 when he was a Lance Corporal in the Prussian Army.1 He was to serve throughout the Napoleonic wars working for both the Prussians and the Russians. However: "throughout his military career he never held a command and was probably unsuited for such. He was essentially a student of war..."2 However, despite this lack of command, Clausewitz had certainly gained enough experience during the Napoleonic wars to have a fairly comprehensive idea about what war was: "Before he was forty, he had taken part in some of the greatest battles in the history of warfare and had seen the armies of Napoleon storm their way across Europe to Moscow... Alls this had been the result of military operations, but it was clear to Clausewitz as a young man that the explanation for the success or failure of these operations was not to be sought on the battlefield alone".3 As a result of this, during his career he came up with many ideas of views on the nature and conduct of war, writing literally thousands of pages of manuscripts on a wide range of areas ranging from politics to tactics.4 After the wars end, he set about trying to write a comprehensive eight part 'guide' on

  • Word count: 3995
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: History
Access this essay

In your opinion, how many capitalisms are there in the global system?

When is, according to Clausewitz, a war victoriously concluded? Discuss with reference to contemporary examples. Since the dawn of mankind, wars have been fought. And since the beginning of history, they have been chronicled and analysed. Man has always sought to understand this most destructive of his endeavours. From Tacticus to Liddell-Hart, war has been the focus of many a theoretical study. Carl von Clausewitz was a Prussian officer during and after the wars of the Republic and the Empire and wrote On War, in one way or another, over the course of his adult life. He fought against the French throughout the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, from the early campaigns in Germany in 1793 as a mere child, to acting as Chief-Of-Staff of a Prussian Corps on the allied left in the Waterloo campaign. The new warfare of the French at this time made a profound impression on him and shaped On War. It was finally published after his death in 18321. Victory in war is every soldier's raison d'etre. Yet defining a victory is less simple. Fundamentally, victory can be seen as the fulfilment of one's object in war. So in order to define victory, we must define our aims. In this essay, I shall attempt to show what Clausewitz thought of as victory, or more precisely, what Clausewitz thought of as the nature of the object of war, the fulfilment of which would lead to victory. Clausewitz's

  • Word count: 2435
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Why does Clausewitz's 'absolute war' not occur in reality?

Why does Clausewitz's 'absolute war' not occur in reality? The time when Clausewitz wrote his 'On War', wars were indeed limited due to the total balance of power in Europe. However, the era on which the author concentrated was the Napoleonic era - the period of complete imbalance of power. Thus, Clausewitz's idea of the 'absolute war' was an entirely scientific concept at the time. States did not reach the state of absolute war, neither the statesmen were willing to risk the public support and the structure of alliances by inflicting absolute war on each other. Hence, Clausewitz's term 'absolute war' should be considered as a scientific, even theoretical concept that had to accord with the policy of a given state. Moreover, 'absolute war ' must be considered as a romantic view on war, in order to account for its impossibility. The Romantic way of referring to war is seen throughout Clausewitz's writings. It could be argued that the absolute concept of war is an invention of a period of moderation, when romanticism was the way of portraying war in order to present it as a certain phenomenon. This trend could be found in Clausewitz's 'On War', where war is portrayed with a romantic notion in order to impress, or even astonish the reader with a phenomenon of war. Clausewitz detested the French. Nevertheless, he admires Napoleon for his total perception of conquest and for his

  • Word count: 919
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Art of War Studies

Art of War Studies What is War? In order to describe what war is one has to define it. According to The Collins Dictionary war is 1. open armed conflict between two or more parties, nations or states... 2. a particular armed conflict: the 1973 war in Middle East. 3. the techniques of armed conflict as a study, science, or profession. 4. and conflict or contest: the war against crime. 5. (modifier) of, resulting from a characteristic of war: war damage; war history. This is obviously straight to the point, but does not go into enough detail to fully describe what war is. Clausewitz chooses not to follow the definitions put forward by, what he calls, "publicists", in ' Vom Kriege'. Instead he puts forward his own view that it "is nothing but a duel on an extensive scale." To fully understand what war is you have to look at the four main factors in war; force, the agents involved, intensity and duration, and teleology. The use of force and the violent nature of it is arguably the most obvious feature of war. However, one has to consider what force actually is, the answer to this creating significant disagreement. When talking about the use of force as a feature of war one immediately considers this force to be of military form, whereby weapons are used to strike down their opponents. This is of course true to an extent, but is not the only force used in war. Force can also

  • Word count: 1493
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: History
Access this essay

How satisfactory are the various accounts put forward regarding the causes of War.

How satisfactory are the various accounts put forward regarding the causes of War. Generalisations about the causes of war are a very difficult thing to do. No two wars are exactly the same, they are between different countries, over different issues and are started in different ways using different technology, so to try to find common causes is always going to be difficult. In order for any explanation to be satisfactory, it must answer the three basic questions; "What is happening? Why is it happening? How can it be improved?" In this essay I will firstly establish how a theory can be examined, I will then explain the main theories of the causes of war using one writer who best sums up each theory. The theories I will examine are; Realism, Idealism, Marxism and the Psychological approach. The writers I shall use are; Von Clausewitz, Wright, Lenin and Huxley. I will then explain some of the problems of each theory and judge how satisfactory each one is. War is essentially to be taken in this essay as "Purposive armed conflict between two or more states where people are killed and things are damaged." K.N Waltz argued that for any theory about international relations to be relevant, it had to address the problem at three levels; the individual; the state; and the systems level (the systems level being the existence of an international structure which creates a difference

  • Word count: 2919
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

To what extent is terrorism a successful military strategy for achieving political objectives?

To what extent is terrorism a successful military strategy for achieving political objectives? (use at least two examples) . Problem The issues here are whether terrorism is a military strategy, and if so, whether it is successful. The problems associated with these issues includes * Identifying military strategies, and judging whether terrorism as a military strategy is successful. * Discovering the criterias for a successful military strategy. * Ensuring that a clear distinction between terrorist and non-terrorist acts is made, as most terrorists view their acts, as carrying out a military operation. * Deciding whether terrorism is a successful military strategy in achieving its political objectives. 2. Its significance The issues mentioned in section one are significant in the study of terrorism in International relations because they * Would provide a connection between military means and political ends. * Are associated with horror and violence, which fascinate humans. * Would allow an understanding of the nature of terrorism, which would make it more probable that countering it would not compromise democratic freedom, and also enable a more accurate security agenda for countering it. * Would enable a correct evaluation of the rationality of terrorist acts, * They affect important issues such as arms control, nuclear weapons, technology, military,

  • Word count: 2178
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

What do you understand by the term Total War?

What do you understand by the term Total War? The understanding of the term 'Total War' is critical to understanding how wars are fought and how they affect society. By using a combination of primary and secondary sources in books and journals and also Internet articles, this essay will argue that the term is not applicable to all forms of warfare. The essay will begin by defining the term, using academic definitions, and will show how Total War differs from other wars, for example guerilla and terrorist wars. Other terms, which are associated with Total War, such as air power and mass bombing, will also be explained, and how these methods have been used to widen the theatre of war away from the battlefield and into civilian life. Furthermore the essay will show how governments intervene to control a war on the home front, using powers to control civilian and industrial life. Finally the essay will conclude with my own personal definition, taken from the sum of the material represented. The definitions of Total War are numerous and varied, beginning with Philip Taylor's view of Total War; "The entire resources of the nation had to be mobilised against the entire resources of the enemy before victory could be secured"1. Roger Chickering gives a much better definition; "Total war is distinguished by its intensity and extent. Theatres of operation span the globe; the scale of

  • Word count: 2971
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Historical and Philosophical studies
Access this essay

Difficulties of giving a single definition of war

HUA101 Introduction to War and Society: Theories of War Critically account for the difficulties that exist in providing a single definition of war. To give a single definition of war that could give an explanation without any controversy would be highly difficult; this is because there are many interpretations of war from so many different aspects which are influenced by the political or philosophical attitude the author has. What war is requires the people that are allowed to begin and engage in war and a person's definition of war often comes from the person's widening political ideology, an example would be when limiting war to a conflict between nations or state. Alternative interpretations can include conflict not just only between nations but also schools of thought and/or ideologies. Form Carl Von Clausewitz book, 'On War', it gives the definition of war as "the continuation of political intercourse with the addition of other means", while Cicero defines war as "a contention by force", Thomas Hobbes adds that "By war is meant a state of affairs, which may exist even while its operations are not continued." Hugo Grotius explains that "war is the state of contending parties, considered as such." Denis Diderot notes that war is "a convulsive and violent disease of the body politic." Each writer has different definitions and within these they all have strengths and

  • Word count: 1185
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Historical and Philosophical studies
Access this essay

Is War inevitable amongst sovereign States?

Robin Walden International Relations Seminar Leader: Andy Patmore Is War inevitable amongst sovereign States? War has always occurred. The problem of War has been continually examined from Ancient Greek philosophers to twenty first century political theorists. Different cultures, religions and nations have continually clashed over territory, politics and resources. The seeming inevitability of War has been widely discussed among philosophers and political scientists throughout history. Many theories have attempted to answer whether War is inevitable, often offering an apparently conclusive opinion. However, to satisfactorily answer this question means considering the contrasting views that have consistently been presented by different schools of thought; the inevitability of War strictly depends on assumptions of war, man and the states system of International Relations. The Idealist perception of the inevitability of War would vary markedly from a Realist perception. History tends to suggest that War is indeed inevitable, yet there are many well revered thinkers who would point to the very real possibility of "a universal and perpetual peace".1 It is also important to consider the meaning of sovereignty, for the difference between war amongst sovereign nations and non-sovereign nations are vastly different concerns. In order to fully develop whether War is inevitable

  • Word count: 2701
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay

Moltke's War Strategy

Moltke's War Strategy Moltke's strategy was one of finishing wars as quickly as possible. Moltke's concepts were based in the ideas of Clausewitz, who wrote that "crushing" the opponent was an undesirable aim, noting that the cease of "primitive capitalism" recognised by Kehr made the country economically vulnerable. However, Moltke rejected Clausewitz's idea regarding the role of politics in warfare, seeing warfare as an independent entity to be pursued by professional soldiers living outside the influence of politicians. He also recognised that in the wake of the weapons revolution of the nineteenth century, the army had become closely tied to the technological and economic power of the country. As such, Moltke made strategy subservient to these factors and twinned the tactics of the army to its technology and the demands of capitalism. Moltke's strategy is summed up by a memo that he sent to the upper echelons of the General Staff in 1869 in which he said "Modern warfare is categorised by the urge to achieve a decisive and rapid conclusion". Capitalism and brutal economics were the first reason he gave for his strategy. Citing the "strength of the armies, the expense of keeping them provisioned, the expense of keeping them under arms, the interruption of trade and transportation, combined with the speed of troop organisation" he claimed a swift conclusion to any

  • Word count: 560
  • Level: University Degree
  • Subject: Social studies
Access this essay